+ace888 Posted December 2, 2013 Posted December 2, 2013 (edited) Interesting test... Edited December 2, 2013 by ace888 1
fallenphoenix1986 Posted December 2, 2013 Posted December 2, 2013 Quite liking the twin Amraam rail. Craig
+allenjb42 Posted December 2, 2013 Posted December 2, 2013 Quite liking the twin Amraam rail. Craig Me too. 4 missiles under the belly + 4 Amraams + 2 Sidewinders = 10 missiles Finally, something to compete with the SU-27!
Caesar Posted December 2, 2013 Posted December 2, 2013 Well, not all was a loss: the HARM trials were instrumental for the cockpit configuration when they started putting LANTIRN pods on the jet - the stick and screen on the left console were holdovers from HARM trials.
turkeydriver Posted December 3, 2013 Posted December 3, 2013 Well, not all was a loss: the HARM trials were instrumental for the cockpit configuration when they started putting LANTIRN pods on the jet - the stick and screen on the left console were holdovers from HARM trials. Actually the stick on the left is from the cancelled A-12, I had no idea HARM trials went beyond load testing, thanks for the info. I know the LANTIRN pylon was the HARM pylon, and that was a key point in keeping the cost low. Ace888, I have no idea where you got those pictures but they are amazing, thanks for them.
Caesar Posted December 3, 2013 Posted December 3, 2013 Actually the stick on the left is from the cancelled A-12, I had no idea HARM trials went beyond load testing, thanks for the info. I know the LANTIRN pylon was the HARM pylon, and that was a key point in keeping the cost low. Ace888, I have no idea where you got those pictures but they are amazing, thanks for them. Ah, got my memory screwed up. HARM did still play a role in LANTIRN integration, as you wrote, with the adapter, NOT the stick/screen. "Hey Joe" Parsons (involved in that integration) explained: "The Tomcat never received HARM in the fleet although testing was accomplished. Note: one of "miracles" in LANTIRN integration was that HARM adapter was just right to carry LANTIRN thereby eliminating need to develop an adapter (a showstopper)" Good call.
turkeydriver Posted December 4, 2013 Posted December 4, 2013 The more I read about fighter development and history, it becomes easy to spot fashions and trends and political maneuvering to support a specific type of fighter and all the real physics and engineering doesn't really matter because the powers that be want X instead of Y. The tomcat isn't a clean Block 30 F-16C in the dogfight arena, but man that potential, truly the F-22 of the 70s and 80s.....including costwise.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now